More recently, some theorists have proposed ambitious dual-system theories of mental architecture, according to which human central cognition is composed of two multi-purpose reasoning systems, usually called System 1 and System 2, the former having fast-process characteristics and the latter slow-process ones. Since the 1970s, researchers on various aspects of human psychology have developed dual-process theories, according to which there are two distinct processing mechanisms for a given task - one fast, effortless, automatic, nonconscious, inflexible, heavily contextualized, and undemanding of working memory, and the other slow, effortful, controlled, conscious, flexible, decontextualized, and demanding of working memory. In recent years an exciting body of work has emerged from various quarters devoted to exploring the idea that there is a fundamental duality in the human mind. Nevertheless, I deny that co-cognition equates to simulation proper or that it plays anything more than a supporting role in understanding reasons for action. For example, I claim it rests in part on a capacity for co-cognition, inter alia, since that ability is necessary for understanding another’s thoughts. In the concluding postscript, I acknowledge that we need more than the folk psychological framework to understand how we understand reasons, but I deny that this something more takes the form of a theory about propositional attitudes or simulative procedures for manipulating them. This should expose the impotence of the standard reasons for believing that folk psychology must be a kind of theory. I then go on to demonstrate how the NPH can account for (i) the structural features of folk psychology and (ii) its staged acquisition without buying into the idea that it is a theory, or that it is acquired by means of constructing one. To add appropriate force to this observation, I first say something about why we should reject the widely held assumption that the primary business of folk psychology is to provide third-personal predictions and explanations.
Mind supermind santa barbara series#
A warm friendship ensued, and since then the two have taken part in many events together, such as at the Mind and Supermind Lecture Series in Santa Barbara, where Cleese interviewed Tarnas on the stage of the Lobero Theatre after the publication of his book Cosmos and Psyche.My purpose in this paper is merely to spell out just how the Narrative Practice Hypothesis, if true, undercuts any need to appeal to either theory or simulation when it comes to explaining the basis of folk psychological understanding: these heuristics do not come into play other than in cases of in which the framework is used to speculate about why another may have acted.
In the summer of 2003, Cleese became friends with Tarnas after attending a "Psyche and Cosmos" workshop that Tarnas and Stanislav Grof, a founder of transpersonal psychology, were offering at Esalen Institute. "Cleese had first become acquainted with" Richard Tarnas's "work when he read The Passion of the Western Mind in England in the 1990s and signed a contract with the BBC to host a documentary series based on that book.
Mind supermind santa barbara how to#
He is also the coauthor with Robin Skynner of two books on relationships: Families and How to Survive Them and Life and How to Survive It. Andrews and as visiting professor at Cornell University. A graduate of Cambridge University, where he read Law and was a member of the famous Cambridge Footlights Revue, he later served as the rector of the University of St. "But Cleese is no stranger to the academic world. "John Cleese is best known as an actor and writer, as a member of the legendary comedy group Monty Python, and for his award-winning television series Fawlty Towers (described by Entertainment Weekly as "the Sistine Chapel of sitcoms") and the critically acclaimed film A Fish Called Wanda.
0 kommentar(er)
